I corrected him. I said it was first introduced in 1931. He went on to say it was modified and extended by them. The only extension done was that in 1935 Fianna Fáil put on higher rates on the cinema show. I do not know whether that can be called a development of the exemption for the show that was wholly or mainly personal. That was started in 1931 and was not changed by Fianna Fáil.
When this was first under discussion in this House, when the Budget resolutions were debated, Deputy MacEntee asserted quite boldly here that he knew of a cinema in the City of Dublin outside the patent theatres which had enjoyed a remission of tax because it had personal performances, and he added that he was told so by the proprietor. That looked definite as the Deputy was giving the basis of his authority, but when I questioned him about it I was told it was the Ritz Cinema. Later there was a lot of fumbling as to whether it was the Ritz or some other cinema in the Ringsend direction. There are only two. Neither ever had a cinema show. I would certainly like to see the proprietor faced with the statement that Deputy MacEntee made in the House and asked if he told the Deputy or if it was the Deputy himself who put it forward, so that we might see where the falsehood started. The cinema had no show and could not have had one, because the Dublin Corporation has various regulations in regard to dressing-rooms, exits and other precautions, which would prevent these cinemas from coming within the regulations. If the proprietor of the Ritz told the Deputy that, he told something which was false, or else the Deputy told something in this House which was false. I do not know which of them is to blame, but it is between the two of them.
We are asked to give a certain benefit here to people who put on personal performances. Statements have been made in the debate on this amendment dealing with the situation in the patent theatres. There has been a differentiation for years in connection with patent theatres. There are seven theatres in the City of Dublin who have qualified for letters patent granted to them. In fact not all these seven patent theatres do give cine-variety performances. The Royal and Capitol do; they have done so for a number of years past. To a lesser extent the Queens and the Olympia do. They are four out of the seven. They are the only four who have ever really qualified by giving cine-variety shows. That position has continued for years and a special position was therefore quite properly given to these people. If anybody goes back far enough to the days before the 1914 war they will remember that the Theatre Royal then was mainly a variety house. It sometimes gave straight theatre but, in the main, it went in for ordinary drama in the nature of a variety show. It has a reputation and a very old tradition with regard to that. Since the Capitol was established it has gone in for a certain amount of variety. These theatres have a very special position but they have earned it. If this remission were not given to them they would abandon variety and this city would have nothing except the complete cinema show.
Since 1931 it was possible for any cinema in this country to obtain a remission of the whole of the tax by putting on shows that qualified for such remission by being wholly or mainly personal performances; the mainly was adjudged to be variety lasting for more than half the time occupied or given over to personal performances. That was the position in this country since 1931. Only 11 theatres, 11 cinemas over the entire country felt that there was any demand on them. Any theatre could get the whole remission of the tax by having a minute more than half the time given over to the personal show. Only 11 cinemas prior to the period of evasion that set in after the October Supplementary Budget ever thought it worth their while to qualify.
Deputy MacEntee said that surely the citizens of Galway and Cork had a right to this privilege. It is rather significant that Cork never had a cinema which decided to go in for personal performances in order to get the entire remission. I am speaking always now with the reservation of what I call the "evasion" period that set in after the Supplementary Budget. Galway, I think, had a cinema that qualified. Out of the entire country there were only 11 cases.
I spoke here earlier and I pointed to these places and I said that anybody who knew the places and knew the little theatres in these places could scarcely contend that there was any big number of variety artistes given employment in these places. There is one in Lucan, one in Navan, one in Old-castle, one in Kilbeggan, one in Kildare, one in Naas, one in Baltinglass and one in Moville. That is only eight out of the 11. It is quite clear that those places that qualified were not employing professional artistes at all. They were employing local talent as it is called, and the amount of employment given was very small indeed. There is one big place in Drogheda, one in Portlaoighise and one in Limerick.
A small group of people thought it worth while, in order to escape the entire cinema tax, to put on personal performances lasting for more than half the show and that was the situation up to the putting on of the very heavy increased tax in the October Budget. After that a very big evasion took place, or an attempt at evasion, and quite a successful evasion it was indeed. These are the figures. Out of 360 cinemas 248 went over to what they called wholly or mainly personal performances from the time when the Supplementary Budget tax was put on, which was somewhere about the beginning of this year. Out of 360 cinemas 248 went over to cine-variety. In the majority of cases the method adopted was that the cinema show was advertised from eight to ten. The house was opened from six to ten. From six to eight a man went up on the stage and strummed a banjo or played a piano. That lasted for ten minutes more than the actual time taken for the picture. That was supposed to be a personal performance. It was, of course, a clear and successful evasion.
I would like to read to the House an account of an inspection that took place at one of these so-called cine-variety shows. I shall not mention where it is. The cinema on that particular night was showing The Citadel. I am sure the Deputies know the picture. The film lasted from 8.52 to 10.48. The house was opened at a minute or two to 6 o'clock.
When the inspector visited it the whole place was in darkness except that there was a light on a dais up beside the platform. On the stage there was a man playing a violin. He played the violin from six o'clock until five minutes past six. He was replaced at five minutes past six by a girl who played the piano until 6.37. At 6.37 the man made his reappearance with an accordion; the girl stayed on at the piano and accompanied the accordion player and they carried on in that way until two minutes past seven. At that point of time four girls tripped out and sang a song accompanied by the pianist. That lasted until ten minutes past seven. Three minutes after the girl resumed her place at the piano and strummed away there from 7.13 to 7.35. At 7.35 five girls came out—the original four with one addition—and they sang on the stage until 7.55. From 7.55 to 8 o'clock their numbers were reduced to three and the three sang for five minutes. The girl took up at the piano at 7.35 and played to 7.43, and from that she sang accompanying herself. At 7.50 the man came back again with the accordion and played the accordion accompanied by the girl at the piano until three minutes past eight. The show was opened at six. At six o'clock, there was nobody in the theatre; at 6.30 there were three people; at 7.30 there were still three people; at 7.45 there were five people; at 7.58 the number had swollen to 13 and at 8 o'clock, when the show proper was about to start, there were 20 people. Eventually the house filled up and in the end there were about 120 people there. That was for the cinema. That is what happened. That is the way evasion was going on. That is what the Opposition Deputies are now trying to prove was a really vital factor in Irish theatrical performances. Inspections were carried out more than once and very much the same situation prevailed.
A rather interesting situation arose out of that. Because this theatre was able to get the whole tax remitted it was able to pull down the prices of admission. The 2/2 seats were reduced to 2/-, the 1/8 were reduced to 1/6, the 1/- were reduced to 9d. and the 4d. were kept at 4d. Prior to that the proprietor had to give away a tax of 10d. on the 2/2, a tax of 7½d. on the 1/8 and a tax of 4d. on the 1/-. Then, he retained all this and put it in his pocket. The entire cast was the lady at the piano, the man who played the accordion and seven girls. They were all local talent and all completely inexperienced. At the end there was in this amateur show a man and a girl who came on with an xylophone and an accordion. They apparently were professionals. They played from 8.37 to 8.52. They were the only people who really counted in the entire show.
That is the basis for this foolish resolution. I suggest that there is nothing in it. The proper way to look at this is by taking the situation that existed prior to the evasion. Only 11 cinemas thought it was worth their while to avoid the entire tax by putting on a show that was either wholly or mainly personal. We want to get away from the situation that existed during the evasion period, and I suggest that the section I have drafted is a suitable section for that purpose. If people want a personal performance and if they have it wholly personal they get a complete remission of the tax. The only other remission is in favour of the patent theatres, in favour of those people who have always had these shows. The Theatre Royal in particular has always had a tradition where variety shows are concerned, and it is only proper to continue it to them. The argument advanced by the Opposition that a number of talented Irish artistes are done out of employment does not stand examination on the facts I have given.
